Posted on 08/12/2015 9:41:16 AM PDT by Borges
I'm going to let all you music-lovers in on a little secret: we professional musicians don't have much use for the phenomenon of the Child Prodigy. Six year old violinists playing Mendelssohn; ten year old pianists playing Rachmaninov; and especially *shudder* twelve year old girls belting out operatic arias... or country music... or whatever... on national television? Yeah, it's impressive. Sort of. You can keep 'em; I have no interest, especially when it comes to the miniature singers.
You know that NPR program "From The Top", featuring adolescent or pre-adolescent performers stunning us with their "maturity" and precocity?
I am not a devotee of that program.
If you are, that's swell for you. Enjoy. But most professionals in the classical music arena look askance at pint-sized virtuosi. So many reasons...
For one thing, the great majority of child performers will eventually crash and burn attempting to make the transition from intuitive tot to analytical adult. There was once a centipede who was asked, "When you walk, in what order do you move your many legs?" The poor bastard had never thought about that, and became so self-conscious he never walked again. This syndrome is the norm for talented kiddies. Child pianists memorize intuitively, by ear; adult professionals memorize in the framework of an analytical system. Children who have been learning complicated masterworks without really knowing how they were doing it can fall into a similar state of paralysis.
Furthermore, that "unusual musical maturity" you think you detect in the oh-so-polished phrasing of a Chopin Nocturne or Paganini Etude is not organic maturity at all. It's apery; it's mimicry; it's the result of carefully imitating some adult's interpretation, be it from the teacher or some recording. Musical compositions which express profound insights about love, loss and life are beyond the ken of a nine year old and that's just how it is. Having a good ear is not the same thing as musical insight.
Another problem relating to emerging from the prodigy stage: child stars become accustomed to being the most successful performer wherever they are. They win the competitions; they receive the adulation; they are Number One, baby! They are able to play difficult compositions eighty percent perfectly with little effort. That in itself poses a problem: when such young musicians go on to major in their instrument at the college or conservatory level, they are too often content to continue achieving 80% perfection with 40% effort. It's not unusual that they find, to their bewilderment, that they are surpasssed by less gifted students who achieve 95% perfection with 110% effort. It's the old Hare-vs-Tortoise story applied to the piano. A few of you may remember a child prodigy of some twenty years ago, a Greek pianist named Dmitri Sgouros. He made a sensation performing on the "Tonight Show" and playing the Third Piano Concerto of Rachmaninov at age ten or eleven. My wife knew one of his teachers in America and was privy to the following anecdote: At age eleven, Sgouros played through the Brahms Piano Sonata in F Minor, a five-movement beast to play, at sight. He then played through it a second time and pronounced the piece memorized and ready for performance. Wow! Gee! Gasp! Why, he's another Franz Liszt!
It's now 2012 and Dmitri Sgouros is a musician in this thirties. Is he the greatest living pianist? Does he perform to sold-out houses in New York, Chicago and L.A.? Will he go down in history? And was his performance of the Brahms F Minor Sonata a performance for the ages?
No, no, no and no. He's got a website; plays in Greece and so forth--that's nice, I suppose. See, the reality is that for every Yehudi Menuhin (prodigy who became an all-time great artist), there are one hundred Dmitri Sgouros's whose bright flame dims with age. (I know that statistic is accurate because I just made it up.)
But as much disdain and eye-rolling weariness as I feel for instrumental prodigies (and I've actually taught a few in my teaching career), it's nothing compared to the scorn I feel for Children Who Sing Opera.
As Joan Rivers would say, can we talk? Let's get something straight: opera is to singing as neuro-surgery is to medicine. No pre-adolescent children should ever do it, and few teen-agers should do much of it. Yes, yes, I know all about Roberta Peters having made her Metropolitan Opera debut at age sixteen. Big whoop, don't care. Until their hormones have finished percolating, children should sing (duh) music written for children: in a children's choir, in school, in church, heck - even in an opera, providing it's a role written for a child. with a child's limitations in mind.
Let me explain. The best metaphor for allowing children to sing adult operatic literature is found in Little League baseball. A responsible Little League coach ensures that a ten-year-old pitcher will throw the ball easily, with a fluid, non-stressful pitching motion. Some specimens in the coaching community, however, can't resist the urge to teach kids to throw trick pitches: curve balls, sliders, screwballs, and so on.
The problem, of course, is that these pitches place a high degree of stress on bones, muscles and tendons. However, the muscular-skeletal system of a baseball player in middle school is still a work in progress and, as such, incapable of tolerating such stress without inducing inflammation at best and serious injury at worst.
It's the very same scenario with children singing opera. The fact is that many college-level voice majors are kept away from the music of Puccini, Verdi and such composers until they enter graduate school.
But here's the worst thing, the thing that really drives me NUTS: when I try to explain this to non-musicians, NO ONE EVER BELIEVES ME! ARRRRGGGGHHHH!! Here are the standard responses I can expect to hear:
"Really? Well, it sounded fine to me..."
"Oh, you and your doctorate. You just aren't accustomed to working with younger children, I expect."
"Well, I don't see any problem; he/she certainly seems to enjoy it."
"What's the matter, Glenn - feeling a little jealous?" (Oh yes, how perceptive of you: I'm eaten up with envy that I shall never appear on "America's Got Talent". *snort*)
"Well, I know the teacher, and that teacher is supposed to be really good. I'm sure it's okay in this case."
NO! No it isn't! Not for an eleven year old girl singing Musetta's Waltz or "O mio babbino caro"! Not okay, not okay! That teacher is either delusional or a hack! Stop singing opera! Stop singing opera! The vocal folds which produce musical tones are a highly delicate, extremely fragile, easily damaged organ. Adult opera singers are at risk of incurring injury from over-use; what chance do you think Shirley Temple Junior has? Think about it. That Tweenie girl singing opera is writing checks her body can't cash, even though, yes, it might sound perfectly lovely to YOUR amateur's ears. You don't get to hear her ten years later when her instrument has degraded to the point that a career in the opera field is no longer an option.
And my objections aren't limited to the vocal hazards. Putting a child on television to sing, be it a local, regional, or national audience, is no way to raise a kid. It's even worse when the TV program is in the format of a competition. You do understand that a child with an unusually mature voice still has a child's emotional maturity, don't you? A youngster who has been always been praised for her beautiful voice is swimming with sharks once a Career In Show Business has been launched. Regardless of how much cash is earned, regardless of the fan letters received or the pride felt by the pushy stage-parents, here's what the child faces: Hurtful, snide criticism by the Simon Cowells of the world. Losing; losing competitions, losing recording contracts if sales aren't up to snuff; and public rejection for everyone to see, perhaps with TV cameras trained on their faces as someone else's name is announced as the winner, following the trail of tears rolling down their cheeks. Losing an election for class president is a valuable experience; losing a damn singing contest on TV at a young age is traumatic. Being regarded as a freak by other children their own age The pressure of doing what they're doing so as not to disappoint the adults in their lives: ambitious parents, the teacher who may be fixated on the vicarious thrill of a student's success; adults with whom they spend most of their time interacting instead of with their chronological peers. I know there are highly-educated, well-intended private voice teachers out there in your community who "specialize" in the vocal training of children and likely come with any number of glowing endorsements and recommendations. Here's my recommendation: if your ten year old daughter has a nice voice, do her a favor and let her take piano or guitar lessons. Then she'll have the solid musical foundation and musicianship skills that will pay dividends when she reaches the age Mother Nature intended for serious vocal study to begin. If that highly educated private teacher gives her simple songs to sing with a modest range, asking her to perform only in studio recitals, you may just scrape by without doing permanent damage.
I mean, what's your hurry, anyway? Children sing in church, home and school. Leave the stage and the recording studio to the big bad grownups. Thanks.
Celine Dion at 12. Going strong at 40.
You are not.
There's nothing wrong with appreciating music on whatever level you can.
Your posts betray that you are an enthusiatic amateur (nothing wronmg with that) who wants to appear as more than that.
You can't get away with that act with everyone.
Not to mention, most children just have horribly annoying singing voices. It doesn’t matter how “good” they are at singing, there is something about their timbre that is grating. I think it’s perhaps because their voices still carry a bit of that quality that makes adults unable to ignore crying babies.
“Études” just means “studies”, and most composers have written them, including Paganini.
If you don't know that you are clueless when it come to the violin and Paganini.
skeptical of what?
Are they playing or singing or not?
I am trained in opera singing and the sight of a 10 year old girl singing opera makes me cringe. Severe damage can occur to the vocal cords which, if repairable, require surgery. I have had several friends who went through this because they were told to push their voices over their physical limits and beyond a level which would protect their voices. They ended up with nodes on their vocal cords and fairly complicated and iffy surgery.
Women opera singer’s voices mature about the age of 26 if they are adequately protected during their youth. At that some point many of them can peel all eleven coats of enamel off a Rolls without hurting their cords.
But the child operatic prodigy is usually just a flash in the pan. The damage will be extensive if they continue and unfortunately most of them do.
Lot of kids made it. Dad said Brenda Lee from Texas at 16 but that’d be considered old.
Uh,... OK
I don’t claim to know anything about music, but I know a pompous jerk when I “see” one.
Welcome to FR.
You are referring to Borges?
I never claimed I was anything other than an informed amateur. You are posing as a snarky message board warrior without substantive backing to your aspersions.
And you also realize that Beethoven benefitted quite substantially from Clementi's financial skills as a publisher and a promoter. His pocketbook may have slightly colored his opinion.
The author of the article's argument is that raw talent requires training, not coasting, and that sometimes the most talented people - whose talent itself makes them feel that there is no value in study or discipline - will benefit the most from training, and from making progress gradually.
And, of course, Mendelssohn and Mozart are sort of the exceptions that prove the rule.
For every precocious child who could be the next Mendelssohn, there are hundred or more who could have less spectacular but very rewarding careers, but who flame out because their raw talent is exploited rather than developed.
I have the backing of facts and knowledge of the subject.
As my posts show.
A self-admitted amateur like yourself is in no position to know what “substantive backing” is when it comes to this subject.
There is nothing “snarky” about correcting amateur level cluelessness.
I’m sure you have them. You just haven’t shared them on this forum apart from
“You don’t have a clue about [INSERT COMPOSER HERE].”
“Umm I know that composer pretty well actually”
And on to next attack...
Franz Liszt (famously, I thought) modified Paganini compositions for a series of etudes he titled Grands etudes de Paganini.
I'm sure that's what the author was referring to.
What are your credentials, precisely, as a professional?
The Grandes études de Paganini are a series of six études for the piano by Franz Liszt, revised in 1851 from an earlier version (published as Études d'exécution transcendante d'après Paganini, S.140, in 1838). It is almost exclusively in the final version that these pieces are played today.The pieces are all based on the compositions of Niccolò Paganini for violin, and are among the most technically demanding pieces in the piano literature (especially the original versions, before Liszt revised them, thinning the textures and removing some of the more outrageous technical difficulties). The pieces run the gamut of technical hurdles, and frequently require very large stretches by the performer of an eleventh (although all stretches greater than a tenth were removed from the revised versions).
in English, The Paganini Etudes. I know what I am talking about because I played a version of these as arranged for the Piano Accordion after eighteen years of lessons entitled "Some Variations on a Theme from Paganini" and it was considered the most difficult arrangement of music for the Accordion at the time. . . and I assure you it was. They were called the "Paganini Variations".
Especially considering it was paired in the sentence with a Chopin nocturne...piano works.
No.
fwiw - I'm sure you've very good at what you do professionally. I'm guessing however, that civil discourse is not part of your job description.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.